tattoos

  • Thread starter Thread starter latinmasslover
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
There is no church law against it. we just cant do anything to harm our bodies or mutilate them. (exception of disease of course) just be carefull the needles are clean. But if you do choose the Blessed Mother please make it in good taste. My son has one, my daughters husband to be looks like a tatoo parlor, personally if i was your mom i would say no. but if you were my child you would probally do it anyway. so in good taste at least. be careful.
 
brotherhrolf said:
I will be brutally honest. I am not in the least bit attracted to all the twenty-something women with scroll work on the nape of their back - clearly seen at the grocery store. Forty years ago they would have been “marked” women. I am not impressed with the…(I don’t know what to call it)
Click to expand...
My son calls it “A Tramp Stamp”. 😃 And I must agree it fits.
 
Hi everyone,

My Chaldean Catholic priest in California has a tattoo of a cross on his arm. When I visited Michigan, I saw another Chaldean priest with a tattoo of a cross on his arm.

It is traditional for Eastern Catholics who visit Jerusalem to receive a tattoo of a cross, and some do it.

You know what, Jesus had a tattoo!!! 😃 Well, not literally 😛 It’s figurative language, I think:hmmm:
Revelation 19:16: “On his robe and on his thigh he has a name inscribed, King of kings and Lord of lords.”

God bless,

Rony
 
maggieodae said:
My son calls it “A Tramp Stamp”. 😃 And I must agree it fits.
Click to expand...
Oh yes the tramp stamp how could i forget, thats okay wait till these guys get big and fat and their skin starts sagging and the eyes are here and the arms are hanging there, then it wont be so pretty, personally i hate them. My husband got one when we got married with my name. i still dont like it. my daughter is scared to death of needles thank God, she passed out when she got her ears pierced. My son is the only other one he hid it for me for months. oh well they could do worse i guess.
 
maggieodae said:
My son calls it “A Tramp Stamp”. 😃 And I must agree it fits.
Click to expand...
It’s nice to see your display of your Christian attitude. “A Tramp Stamp”. So every woman with a tattoo is a “tramp”?

Nice…Not

I would take a long look at Matthew 7 before you decide to lump all people with an ignorant, blanket generality. But that’s just my opinion.
 
brotherhrolf said:
Templar:

Forty years ago the only people who had tattoos were WWII vets, bikers, and other folks who fit the Fonzie image on Happy Days. Tattoo parlors were in the French Quarter in New Orleans and were frequented by “biker types”. Most of my generation were solidly influenced by the teachings of HMC.

BH, I’m not trying to argue with you about tattoos. In my opinion, I don’t believe that tattoos have the negative stigmas that they did 40 years ago. I’ll use the example of the Harley-Davidson. 40 years ago if you had a harley you were probably an outcast. Now, you can name any social class or vocation and there will be Harley owners. From doctors to attorneys to ceo’s to blue collar guys putting together spare used parts. Should we judge Harley riders by the same standard as tattoos?

I can count on two hands the number of my classmates who grew long hair after we graduated from high school in 69. I can’t count how many enlisted in the years that followed. To listen to the media today, you would think that all of my generation followed what the popular culture dictated and you would be wrong. Forty years ago it was long hair, beads, pot and protest. Where has anything changed today with tattoos? Is it not the same phenomena? Oh, Jesus had long hair and a beard and so did the Apostles. Sound familiar? Chasing after The World is chasing after The World no matter the generation.

**I’m sure that throughout the United States there were communities that didn’t follow the social trends or influences of a given period. But you cannot use that as the norm. The standard is set by a majority and if the majority of your generation did become hippies, and did smoke pot and protest, then that is the norm for that generation.

On a different note, I don’t think Jesus had long hair. **

The big difference is that if I had long hair and got it cut off, I could grow the long hair back. Once I have my body marked, well, it is a different story.

I agree with you 100% here. And also let me reiterate that within this thread on tattoos, I am referring to religious tattoos only.

I will be brutally honest. I am not in the least bit attracted to all the twenty-something women with scroll work on the nape of their back - clearly seen at the grocery store. Forty years ago they would have been “marked” women. I am not impressed with the…(I don’t know what to call it) “growth” on my co-worker’s husbands neck.

I’m not a fan of women with tattoos either. I’m not going to judge them though as I do know a couple of prominent women who have tattoos.

The CCC gives those of you who have tattoos many questions to answer. It is far simpler for me. The body is the Temple of the Holy Spirit.

I have just finished reading the CCC (again) and I don’t recall seeing anything about tattoos. Would you mind pointing out to me what the CCC says about tattoos? Thanks
Click to expand...
 
My opinion would conform more to what TemplarKnight has just posted. Our own opinions shouldn’t cross the line of judging others.

A gentleman I know , in palliative care with a degenerative disease has the tatoo of a dragon which covers almost all of his back. He was originally a Buddhist - now a Catholic. In helping him reconcile his former religion with the new, I advised him not to worry too much about the Buddhism and to concentrate more on Jesus - the only Son of God.

Do you think I would say anything to the effect of the negative things that have been posted here about tattoos to him…? Not even in your dreams ! God is looking at his heart, and this gentleman loves to attend Holy Mass.

Tattoos in my limited opinion are a case of morals, implying that each case is individual and all the circunstances need to be considered duly; otherwise we might find ourselves pre-judging.
 
rinnie said:
Oh yes the tramp stamp how could i forget, thats okay wait till these guys get big and fat and their skin starts sagging …
Click to expand...
I don’t know. That doesn’t sound so pretty even WITHOUT the tattoo…
 
Thus my father’s comment to me being a sheep or a goat. Templar, I went to a working class Catholic boy’s high school. We had two categories of classmates (frats and pitts). Frats wore button down collars and had flat tops. Pitts were the equivalent of the Fonz on Happy Days. I never had long hair, never smoked pot, never protested the Viet Nam War (I enlisted), and I was never unusual in my working class neighborhood. The “norm” for my generation was not “hippie” and I daresay that it applied anywhere across the south.

The point about bikers then and Harley owners today…Harley owners today is an affectation. Shoot, Gov. Foster of Louisiana rode in leathers as does my BIL. (My BIL tries to keep up with his brother It is the world turned upside down. The wealthy engaging their desires to appear “bad”. Forty years ago, a tatoo was definitely NOT something a working class Catholic would want and we knew with absolute CERTAINTY that HMC frowned big time upon such a measure.

And so we come right back to my initial question. Forty years ago HMC frowned mightily upon tattoos. Maggie has given us quotes from the CCC regarding tatoos. Seems to me HMC still regards this question with severity.

Some of you are saying “judge not lest you be judged” and my question to you is: Are there no absolutes? Could we not use “judge not lest you be judged” to authenticate anything regardless of its moral standing? If the body is the Temple of the Holy Spirit and one aught not put graffitti on the Temple was the norm 40 years ago and the CCC still promulgates the very serious nature of the question, how can we so cavilierly utilize the “I’m OK: You’re OK” approach?

Tattoos are an affectation today. It is sheep following sheep.
 
TemplarKnight said:
It’s nice to see your display of your Christian attitude. “A Tramp Stamp”. So every woman with a tattoo is a “tramp”?

Nice…Not

I would take a long look at Matthew 7 before you decide to lump all people with an ignorant, blanket generality. But that’s just my opinion.
Click to expand...
Well now son, this old Irish lady isn’t afraid to state a fact. Just because some people don’t have the nerve to correct bad behavior isn’t necessarily a good thing. I happen to call a spade a spade and those who are mamnby pamby about bad behavior can just get over it.

I dislike tatoos and body piercing. They revolt my senses immensely. So Tramp Stamp is what it is to me, for a young lady to mark up her body with such trash. And the younguns in my family know darn well they are not acceptable in our family.

You can do what you want with your body, but do not expect me to say it is lovely. It’s not. And since I am allowed my opinion to be heard don’t think your going to stop me from saying it loud and clear. Tatoos and Body piercing are NOT acceptable. They make most of us sick just to look at them, So There. 😛
 
Oh the gift to gie us, to see us as others see us. - Robert Bruce.
My wife has no tattoo nor does my sister. Nor does my niece and god daughter. My sons have shown themselves to be sheep although neither has had the courage to confront me. If the World says “Jump in a creek” are you going to do it simply because the World says so? Or will you look at the questions that HMC raises and question your conscience (conscience - Latin “with knowledge”).
 
maggieodae said:
Well now son, this old Irish lady isn’t afraid to state a factyou mean an OPINION. Just because some people don’t have the nerve to correct bad behavior isn’t necessarily a good thing. I happen to call a spade a spade and those who are mamnby pamby about bad behavior can just get over it.

I dislike tatoos and body piercing. I bet you didn’t care for the piercing our Lord received too? They revolt my senses immensely. So Tramp Stamp is what it is to me, for a young lady to mark up her body with such trash. **So I guess a crucifix, or Our Blessed Mother or any other religious icon is trash?**And the younguns in my family know darn well they are not acceptable in our family. **So what will you do, excommunicate your family if they get a tattoo or a body piercing? **

You can do what you want with your body, but do not expect me to say it is lovely. It’s not. And since I am allowed my opinion to be heard don’t think your going to stop me from saying it loud and clear. Tatoos and Body piercing are NOT acceptable. They make most of us sick just to look at them, So There. 😛
Click to expand...
What you like or dislike is really insignificant. Personally, I don’t care about your “opinion”. You are entitled to your opinion, and entitled to voice your opinion, as we all are, however your opinion weighs not one iota more than any other individual. I just find it extremely humorous that you claim to be a Catholic and a “prayer warrior” yet you are going to make a biased ignorant judgmental statement. Your words give the impression that you are a hypocrite. So if a young lady has a tattoo are you not going to pray for her? Do you only pray for those you deem socially acceptable? Are you the standard by which others are judged? Because I missed the memo that said you were now in charge.
 
brotherhrolf said:
The “norm” for my generation was not “hippie” and I daresay that it applied anywhere across the south.

I, myself, came from an upbringing where hard work was no stranger. I have the scars and calluses to prove it. Living in the south as I do (as well as you) I would agree that across the south, things are different. But where I will disagree with you is that the norm for your generation was hippie-dom. Any large city (large=>300K people) had a significant hippie movement. The hippie movement spread like wildfire through almost every major city. History shows this as fact, it’s indisputable with the exception of isolated pockets of the deep south. Even then, I bet we could show Atlanta had hippie activity.

The point about bikers then and Harley owners today…Harley owners today is an affectation. Shoot, Gov. Foster of Louisiana rode in leathers as does my BIL. (My BIL tries to keep up with his brother It is the world turned upside down. The wealthy engaging their desires to appear “bad”. Forty years ago, a tatoo was definitely NOT something a working class Catholic would want and we knew with absolute CERTAINTY that HMC frowned big time upon such a measure.

**40 years ago if you rode a Harley, there were many places you would be chased out of town, especially in the deep south. Now it’s OK. Why? Sure there’s still a negative stereotype, but that doesn’t stop record purchase of HD’s. **

And so we come right back to my initial question. Forty years ago HMC frowned mightily upon tattoos.

40 years ago the Church frowned on many things. Did Vatican II change any of those? The Church has changed in 40 years as has society.

Maggie has given us quotes from the CCC regarding tatoos. Seems to me HMC still regards this question with severity.

Maggie is so far off the mark it’s amazing she’s still around. She’s quoting the CCC that has absolutely nothing to do with tattoos. Here’s two examples of how far off base she is.

“…taking into account the needs of others and the common good” (Catechism, no. 2288)

Not only does 2288 have nothing to do with tattoos, but is so vague and undefined, you can insert any social malady and it can be covered by 2288. This is not even on the same planet.

Next

“…if the act renders a bodily organ unable to perform its function—the act is immoral (Catechism, no. 2297)”

The first four words of 2297 is ‘kidnapping and hostage taking’. So can you honestly associate kidnapping and hostage taking with getting a tattoo? Or how about the reference to torture? Or this is the best one, will she cite “mutilations”? If so, will she continue the sentence “…mutilations and sterilizations performed on innocent persons are against the moral law”.

So voluntarily getting a tattoo of Jesus on the cross equates to kidnapping, torture and mutilation? NO. Talk about taking something out of context.

Some of you are saying “judge not lest you be judged” and my question to you is: Are there no absolutes?

Yes. There are absolutes.

Could we not use “judge not lest you be judged” to authenticate anything regardless of its moral standing?

Show me where we are allowed to judge people. Show me where it is “OK” to judge someone. Are you going to turn someone away because there hair is long, or they’re homeless, or they have tattoos? I guess I’m off base but I thought part of our role as an imitator of Christ was to “love our neighbor”. Did I not read in Matthew 22:39 (DR) that the second greatest commandment was “Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself”? I guess they forgot to add "as long as you meet the current social norms and acceptable behavior."

If the body is the Temple of the Holy Spirit and one aught not put graffitti on the Temple was the norm 40 years ago and the CCC still promulgates the very serious nature of the question, how can we so cavilierly utilize the “I’m OK: You’re OK” approach?

**So we can’t have art on the temple? So we can’t allow men to be over 15% bodyfat, right? (you’re not taking care of the temple and letting it fall to shambles). Being fat is much more of a health risk than tattoos. And I have yet to see any definitive public propagation by the CCC about tattoos. Can someone show me a definitive quote from Canon Law?

40 Years ago I ride a HD and I’m a rebel and an outcast. Today I ride a HD and I’m a respected businessman. 40 years ago I have a tattoo and I’m a drunken sailor, today I have a tattoo and I’m a civil judge. Why do you get to judge?**

Tattoos are an affectation today. It is sheep following sheep.
Click to expand...
If you don’t like tattoos, or detest tattoos, that’s great. That’s your opinion, an opinion you have the right to voice. Where you don’t have the right is to judge others, or make erroneous, vague statements from the CCC or dictate what is acceptable and what is not. Didn’t a little Austrian around the mid '30’s think he had the right to judge what was acceptable and what was not? The Bible teaches us “judge not lest we be judged”; it’s not conditional.
 
Ah, the tramp stamp. I have one. My dad and I got tattoos last year when we were both diagnosed with cancer. I never thought about this as a moral issue; I’m not sure why anyone would be offended by another’s body art, unless the subject matter is truly offensive. If a person wants to get a religious tattoo, what’s the issue? Like all things, they need to be smart about it, consider the questions Maggieodae put forth on the first page, and make their decision.
 
Ach! Have I opened a can of worms and, yes, I did indeed intend to open that can of worms. For better or worse, there are still those of us who grew up with the norms of HMC in the 50s and 60s. My conscience was formed in those days and I still judge things according to those standards. Tattoos seem trivial to those of you today but they were anything but in my day. If you got a tattoo in my day, you were a revolutionary. The number of young women I see at the local grocery store with scroll work on the nape of their back is overwhelmining. I’m not looking for it. Indeed, I don’t want to see it. Maggie has put it in words that I won’t use. But I can tell you this, I agree with her. Sheep following the flock. I am repulsed when I see this - particularly when the young mother has a child.

Forty years ago HMC was dead set against this practice. Forty years ago only people of a certain sort of socio-economic level got them. What has changed? I have to tell all of you young folks that what you think is cool, I believe is tawdry. Maggie is far more blunt than me but our thoughts are similar. The World has decreed that tattoos are OK. The World. Not HMC. And the fact that not one of you could give me a reasonable explanation to counter HMC gives me great pause. I beg all of you to reconsider what my father taught me. Are you sheep or are you goats?
 
This is the Traditional Catholicism forum. Forty years ago tattoos were anathema to traditional Catholics. Forty years ago the sisters and brothers taught me that the body was the Temple of the Holy Spirit and that one did not put graffitti on the temple.

I still have not gotten an answer to my question. No one has been able to answer me that HMC says that tatoos are acceptable. Everyone has gotten bent out of shape because Maggie posted what the CCC has said.

So, folks. As my father said, are we sheep or are we goats?

Not a one of you advocating tattoos has convinced me from a moral standpoint. I wait.

Someone please tell me from a traditional Catholic viewpoint why tattoos are OK when they weren’t in the late 50s/early 60s.
 
aurora77 said:
Ah, the tramp stamp. I have one. My dad and I got tattoos last year when we were both diagnosed with cancer. I never thought about this as a moral issue; I’m not sure why anyone would be offended by another’s body art, unless the subject matter is truly offensive. If a person wants to get a religious tattoo, what’s the issue? Like all things, they need to be smart about it, consider the questions Maggieodae put forth on the first page, and make their decision.
Click to expand...
I don’t see how anyone could call the expression of a bond between you and your father morally wrong aurora 77.

I’ll probably never get a tattoo myself (I’d be starting very late if I got one now), but that’s more me just not wanting to get stuck or poked with the tattooers sharp tools.

We should really try in this thread to find a different way to describe tattoos other than by using the word **“tramp”. **To anyone who doesn’t want to stop using that word in this thread; may I offer you a little food for thought?

(This by your own definition and use of the word tramp):
It might help if we recall that our risen Lord Jesus, after His Resurrection chose to first appear to Mary Magdalene - the **“tramp”. **…do you get what we’re saying now?
 
Hi
I have five tattoos soon to be six i dont see a problem with people having tattoos i think its a personal thing all of my tattoos means something personal to me i see them as part of me and art i know not everyone likes them and thats fine i also make sure all of my tattoos are covered in church as im very aware people either love them or hate them.
I think everyone is an individual and thats the way the lord made us i have never seen anywhere that it is wrong to have a tattoo and have never been told it either, None of my tattoos are rude or offensive they might not be pretty to some people but they are to me, im not really bothered about people judging me as its not them who ultimately can judge me so what others say just goes over my head.
I think everyone should be respected for their individuality whether they be tattooed pierced, spiky haired whatever i do find it really interesting though at how many people judge you on whats on the outside you can get a few funny looks in the street.
x
 
I’m would definately get like a cross or something religious tatooed on me because like my love for God, its permanant.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top